How to Lose Traffic and Alienate People: The Revenge!

Google probably searches words themselves too, so if you do a search for fun, you will probably get "funny" and "funniest" as well as terms related to fun, albiet o a seperate page. Also, Google did do a search for shad, otherwise some guy named shad would not have come up in the first place.
Other than that, great article.
You could also add sites that frequently update their contents and don't have an RSS feed.

I have to agree with everything you said. Even though breaking up longer articles may piss off some users, If you can break up the articles into more specific sections, this will maximize your exposure to search engines. I too am annoyed by google's ability to do a search for words inside words. I guess that is what Bing is trying to expose and fix. However when searching for something specific, like how to code something, or why I got this exception in my .NET application, I often find that google is still the best in search.

http://prosportnutrition.net/?a=633808700294218750

well its also possible to have just searched for grand central "shad" and with the last part in quotes so then google won't automatically try and correct it.

I just have to say, that I fully agree with everything you said. I'm just very disappointed that once I was done with your article, I proceeded to another article and I was assaulted by the very video ad that you mentioned. I Really wish the administrators of popsci.com would read your article, and actually take it to heart.

no big surprise on the ad related stuff. The telemarketers/junkmailers have hit the web. Do they know that people hate most of this stuff? Sure, but it is probably profitable.

The business model seems to be to find some incredibly cheap method of passing your message to bezillions of consumers. They apparently get enough business from mistakes/unconscious name recognition and the like to keep going.

I think someone mentioned it in the comments in the original article, but it's still something around that really bothers me. The banner ad's that grow. There's a few types of these, the ones that when you mouse over, they grow and overlap things on the page, usually the link I want to click. Others just load small when the page loads, and with no provoking, they grow which moves all the content on the page down the screen so you lose your spot, then you correct it and then it shrinks, so you lose your place again. SO Frustrating!

Here is yet another way of driving traffic away from a search engine: About 2 years back, I was searching on Google to find Tag Heuer "success is a minds game" ads...and guess what, I have been bombarded with spam offers to sell fake Rolexes and Tag Heuers - even today.

RaviP

Sorry for the double post but,
C'mon with the shad. Google is the best at taking whatever stupid thing you type in, and giving you the results that you're probably looking for. Honestly when you typed grand central shad even I thought you were looking for someone named shad in grand central.
Someone says shad and my first reaction is I think your not speaking english. Then you say shad is a type of fish you want in a restaurant and I get it. And yes someone pointed out above you could put shad in quotes and you won't get results for shade, you could also type in the word fish to give the engine a clue as to what the hell you're talking about.

Anyway 2 great articles on this subject in a row. Its great to see that even though PopSci is in this business, they're even willing to tell their partners when some of these things are out of whack.

Oh and ford2go, the problem with these ads and things that people clearly hate is that they can only be profitable in the short term. Sure an ad company will pay you to have its ads intrude your webpage because it gets a lot of traffic, but look what happens. The site gets less traffic people consumers don't want to see those annoying ad's, that makes ad companies want to pay less because you're getting less traffic, and in the end both parties lose, except the ad companies will find other websites to destroy.

Of course, the next step is to add -shade, and the problem is solved.

I'd like to know what's wrong with capcha. I think it's a neat idea, and I especially like recapcha, which has millions of people helping to put old books on line.

I'd put a couple things at the top of this list:

1. The high google rank of sites that want to charge you for answers to computer problems. Such info has always flowed blessedly freely on the nets. If it starts getting monetized, we're all screwed.
2. Unnecessary subscription processes. The days where even the most obscure sites demand I formalize my relationship with them need to end.
3. Searching for the Search Field. It's like a Where's Waldo game. Perhaps a Search Field to find the Search Field?

Some others I don't like:

1. Any sound on a top-level website. Top-level websites (ie, the thing you see when you go to www.foo.com) should be silent. In particular, don't have a top-level webpage with a ton of flash and cheezy techno "music"! Far too many little companies appear to think that the ability to have a ton of flash indicates "professionalism". Instead, it indicates that someone's kid put together the website and thinks it's kewl.

2. Banner ads that grow and shrink. I think a poster above mentioned these. I've noticed that lots of newspapers like these nowadays. These ads shove the rest of the page down when they expand, and bring it up when they go shrink, making it more likely I'll mis-click.

3. Ultra-tiny click boxes on any sort of ad. Sorry marketroids; 99.9% of people want to kill the evil floating ad ASAP, and making a four-pixel "x" that needs the skills of a first-person sharpshooter to hit won't make people happy.

Google seems to be getting worse. Search for "microeconomic textbook reviews". It does ask "Did you mean: macroeconomic textbook reviews" but only rhetorically, as 8 of the top 10 results are for macro.

If you search for "microeconomics textbook reviews" it doesn't even ask, with half the top 10 results coming up for macroeconomics.

Oh no, I just checked Google Scholar, and it can't differentiate micro and macro either. So much for trusting Google to search the scientific literature.

Google's corrections for me are normally helpful, but you're right, sometimes they are annoying. Check out the top result on Bing for the same query:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=grand+central+shad

I don't know if Bing just doesn't do as many corrections, or if they're smarter about it, but whatever it is, the results for the shad query are better.

while this is all true i seem to remember some bad popsci practices too. For instance the "click here to take a survey and be entered to win" boxes that covered article titles. Then they got rid of PPX with out warning (It had been falling apart any way not paying off until users did their own research, posting it, and hoping). Not to mention their own popsci search is pretty weak and annoying. It returns 5 pages of the same article or sends you to pages that are pretty much just a list of 20 articles for you to sift through. I once spent 2 weeks off and on trying to find an article before i gave up and went through all the paper magazines I had to find it. so in the future fix some of you problems before pointing out others'.

sorry to repost but i have also noticed a lack of the ability to leave comments on some pages. whats up with that? now that PPX is gone if i cant leave comments why do i have a user name?

Excellent Info, I would like to share this with you aswell
http://www.techmasher.com

Excellent list. Some things you find commonly on the web (and even occasionally in newsworthy locations) can be quite annoying when everyone starts using them.

Beecher Bowers
www.beecherbowers.com

I just have to say, that I fully agree with everything you said. I'm just very disappointed that
www.promdresspicture.com
once I was done with your article, I proceeded to another article and I was assaulted by the very video ad that you mentioned. I Really wish the administrators of popsci.com would read your article, and actually take it to heart.

نموذج الأعمال ويبدو أن العثور على بعض طريقة رخيصة بشكل لا يصدق من تمرير الرسالة إلى شركة غازيليون للمستهلكين. يحصلون على ما يكفي من الأعمال على ما يبدو من الاخطاء / التعرف على اسم اللاوعي وترغب في الاستمرار في عملهم.
www.thaicarnews.com
www.autonewstoday.net